Pajiba

I'm so excited to see this in IMAX now.

How do they explain that Captain Pike and Spock are on the same ship 12 years before the original episodes aired, and Pike was mutilated and had to stay on the big headed peoples planet? Or does the original pilot not exist in this universe?

How do they explain that Chekov didn't show up on the Enterprise until the second season? AND WHY DOESN'T HE LOOK LIKE DAVY JONES, DAMMIT?

Oh Gods, I can't wait!

I saw it last night, and I ate every bite, and it was delicious. I will see it again before the weekend is out.

There's no place like the cinema. There's no place like the cinema. There's no place like the cinema....

*sobs* It didn't work! That means I have to wait til tomorrow! *wails* I wanna see a good movie now!

First of all, thanks for the excellent Bob Schneider ref in the title.

Second, is anybody else thrilled that the trailers, ads and even most reviews of this film seem to have gone out of their way to distance from the inexplicable casting of King Douche Perry?

I only read the first paragraph of your review, but that made me happy enough. I'll save the rest till after I see it Sunday.

I'm going to see it on Mother's Day while my mother-in-law is watching my kids. Can't really beat that, can ya? Yay!

lalala (avoiding possible spoilers)

Just wanted to say Thank You, Dan! Your review makes it sound really, really appealing and I'm so happy that there is the hope of people doing things right (cinematically speaking) in this brave new century. We've been watching the Trek-a-thons on the Space channel (extra special thanks to Steven Lloyd Wilson for the awesome overviews) and I've got my movie passes all to the ready. I think I'm gonna go for this one.

Sounds to me like Abrams just plain trashed and did away with Roddenberry's vision in order to make his little 'splosion-fest.

This has NO. SOUL.

This ain't Trek.

BSlim, I think you need a hug.

Saw this movie with a couple of Star Trek geeks and we loved it. Almost perfect and incredibly entertaining.

As my buddy put it: "They pulled a Voyager and it didn't suck!"

One cannon quibble, Uhura asks for a Cardassian Sunrise at the bar. The Federation didn't make contact with the Cardassians until well after Kirk's time. Otherwise, flawless and I will be seeing it again.

Okay. Fine. I'll see it.

THAT is how much power the Pajiba has over me.

A jaded old fuck who was pretty much sure she wouldn't see it because the preview sucked...

... is convinced by Daniel's review that it's worth a try.

BEHOLD, the power of Pajiba.

My first movie of the summer of '09.

Im not a big Star Trek fan or anything but i used to watch Next Generation, Deep Space 9 and Voyager. I saw the trailer just after i saw the one for G.i. Joe and it just didnt do anything for me. But after reading the review i cant wait to see it. Sylar... Sorry Zachary Quinto looked good as Spock.

Either somebody drank long and deep from the Abrams Kool-aid or this movie actually has a chance of impressing me, rather than just not disappointing me. I'm still waiting for the other shoe to drop, but there's rising excitement that I'm having difficulty containing (especially since my Canucks lost last night). Thank godtopus for an IMAX minutes away from my house!

THANK YOU, GOD. I was AFRAID to go see this movie, I am a total Trek WHORE and I couldn't have stood it if they had raped my precious Trek. Thank you for reviewing it, I swear to God my eyes welled up when I saw the awesome feedback.

That is all.

OMG -- I just saw it and it was awesome and I have Spock fantasies now!!!!!

I have never seen the series, but my Dad was a huge fan. My whole family saw it together and my Dad was so happy he almost got choked up. He loved it too. Said it totally honored the spirit of the original series and took the characters cool new places as well.

Am I officially a Trekkie? I guess I must be...

I saw it in IMAX this morning, I walked out beaming. Prior knowledge makes you giggle at some references but I don't think it's necessary. Even cursory knowledge of the characters can make it resonate, but it probably works anyway.

The canon isn't negated, though, it's just divergent, and it's acknowledged that the future still happened, they've just been thrust into another future, and a lot of the future history won't explicitly not happen in this timeline, it just doesn't have to. Everything still exists in another part of space-time, and thus it's entirely possible that Chekov could be there on the maiden voyage because the past twenty years have been a new reality. Sure it's a cheat to get the whole crew onboard, but the logic works.

Plus now they're not required to join up with the episodes. They could do a few movies and not worry that "oh shit, we gotta stop".

"How do we know he didn't invent the thing?"

And yet he did. Hee hee.

Now hold on just a second. If everything happens in an alternate timeline, does that mean the events of Star Trek: First Contact never happened? And if THOSE events never happened, doesn't that mean that no Star Trek can ever happen? Because Warp drive and first contact with the Vulcans was only achieved because of the events in that movie, and if this movie negates anything that happened after ST: Enterprise (essentially), then how do they explain ANYTHING?!

Wow, BSlim is a trekker and there is a chink in Maryscott O'Connor's armor, and it is Pajiba. The more you know.

It is Trekker, Jenn. Trekker. I have been drinking a little.

"... the fantastically done Mission: Impossible III ..."

Hm, i didn't felt this movie to be fantastically. Not at all.

Hey Dan, First Contact was a fine movie. Maybe you just meant "featuring the original cast," perhaps?

Hey, BSlim, there's some kids playing on your lawn.

Yeah, I don't think Picard's interference in "First Contact" is negated. That is prior to the divergence and so at a point when the effect can flow down both time streams. TNG remains, and for that I can allow myself to appreciate New Trek.

I do understand that the events in First Contact occurred before those in this Newfangled ST, but I'm unsure about Picard and the crew existing, due to whatever happens in this movie. If that makes sense. You know - the smallest change in a timeline can have a huge impact and all that. What if this movie means Picard never exists? Then this movie can never exist.

Mindfucked. Oh yes :P Of course, if we're going down this path, you could say that the very fact that this movie exists means that somehow Picard or the equivalent is able to prevent the Borg from fucking up the events of First Contact, so everything's fine by definition. But THEN you could say that it's just a goddamn movie, so get over it.

And yeah, the "fantastic" MI: III threw me as well. I'm still not entirely convinced there won't be another article later on laying waste to this one. The only reason I'm accepting this review at face value is because my brother, an even bigger Trek nerd than me (actually, that's just not true), saw it and said it was great.

The only reason I am seeing it is for Simon Pegg. Everything else is bonus.

Oooh, and I've just thought - if my earlier theory about Picard and crew not existing turns out to be true, then maybe their absence somehow means that the Borg never try any funny business like FC and it's all still okay anyway.

I am taking a summer course in biology, so you can understand why I spend my time thinking about this stuff. Procrastination: father, mother, secret lover.

Craig, I'm pretty sure it started with Batman Begins, to be honest. The trends already begun. *ominous music*

We're back and HOLY SHIT THAT WAS A GOOD MOVIE.

I spent $25 on tickets and Mr. Snuggiepants spent $20 at the concession stand and it was worth every fucking penny and then some.

This is where my Dork Level goes up to about 450: when I first saw the Ramulen ship, I actually had a full body shudder, head to toes.

God. I hate myself for saying that.

Anyway, my old man is the Trekkie, so I thought he'd LOVE it, but you know what he said when we left? IT WAS TOO LOUD. OMG he's 41 but you'd think he was 91. Too loud? Really? I asked him ok, take out the too loud factor and how was it and he said it was "great, but he's a purist." What the HELL does that mean? I didn't even tell him about any of the reviews going in so he'd be totally uncluttered about it and not built up.

Well, funny part was the 14 year old who didn't even want to go ended up squealing and clenching my hand and biting her nails off and at one point toward the end, hissing "TRANSPORT HIM, TRANSPORT HIM NOW!" Ha, I love it.

Toddlers should not go that movie and there were about seven in our theater. What the hell? It's far too loud and scary for a three year old you bastages. GET A SITTER.

Is it horrible that I'm now having seriously X rated fantasies about Spock? The YOUNGER Spock. Not the actor. The actor in character. I want to grab those ears and shove his face somewhere good. My God. He actually made Spock sexy.

@Snuggiepants:

It's not horrible. Not in the slightest. I think it was the eyebrows.

Snuggiepants, I'm totally with you on Spock. Then again I have this thing for Zachary Quinto where he makes me all tingly in my nether-regions...

Saw it after work and dear God, I loved it. My Dad raised me love and respect Star Trek, while also being mindful enough to call the crappy movies and shows when I saw them. Tonight, I went in cautiously hopeful, and let me tell you: I was in tears within the first five minutes, laughing soon after, gasping, weeping, awwww-ing, laughing, gasping, lather, rinse, repeat for 2 solid hours.

Also, I saw Chris Pine in Blind Dating a couple of years ago and thought he was wonderful. Everytime Dustin has implied that he is a talentless douche, I've cringed at my keyboard. And now I can say, Mr. Rowles, with all due love and respect, you can suck it. The smugness that comes from such vindication is sweeter than honey. :-)

"raised me TO love and respect." Sorry, still high from awesome movie. Going to lie down now.

I saw Star Trek yesterday before going to work, (I work the night shift), maintaining my tradition of seeing Star Trek movies on opening day. I was skeptical. I thought it was either going to be really good or really bad. I think J. J. Abrams and everyone else involved did a great job of re-inventing Star Trek. It's both new and old. It is a great movie, and it is great Star Trek. It is NOT the original series, but it is very faithful to the spirit of the characters, as well as being a very exciting and entertaining movie all on its own. I give it 9 Vulcan salutes out of 10. Live long and prosper.

just got back and i have spoiler-y questions:

when did winona ryder become 50?
when did vaako have time to go to med school if he were off searching for the underverse?
where was yoda?
isn't spock a baby doctor?
are there *really* black girls in space?
was it the curve of the screen or were those bad aliens all asymetrical-faced? (i thought dude's eye was sliding off)
could they give that chekhov guy *more* words with v's in them?
do they really have such happening nightclubs in iowa?
why didn't they just use the midi-chlorians to save the old guy who set up ashley judd?
why do the ladies sport such phallic hair?

any help would be appreciated.

Sorry for the Hi-jack ...thankyou to all that made babyname suggestions...the fight is now on...and if my husband thinks that Trousers or Conrad can even be brought to the bargaining table the divorce is on.

Just saw it. Living in Iowa, it was kind of annoying to hear the audience cheer everytime it was shown in the beginning. And NO - they do not have such happening clubs in Iowa, although who knows about the future...

Really great movie though. Fun all over.

Dan,
You drew a loving, sweet, beautiful straw. The first half of your review makes me happy to see this flick tomorrow. *skip the spoileriffic second half*
My wife was a cutesy 7 year old girl award presenter at Trekker Conventions, so I need it to be nice and awesome for Mother's Day.
Please be awesome . . .

Wow, after the review and the comments I'm really looking forward to seeing this. When it was first being talked about and the clips started coming I thought I'd only see it because it was a Trek movie and therefore by some strange obligatory feelings I'd see it in a theater but would be completely disappointed. Now, for the first time, I'm really looking forward to it.

On a completely unrelated note, I think it's funny how many people are so quick to say their not a fan/Trekkie/whatever yet admit to watching various Trek series and are at opening day and/or can talk about minor plot issues. No judgment intended, just an observation that I find humorous.

Just got back from it. Everything said in this review is spot on. He pulled off the near impossible and came up with a movie-logic-based reason for the reboot. So if anyone wants to be picky, all he has to say is "alternate universe, bitches!!!!".

Also, while avoiding spoilers, I loved the line where a certain someone didn't want to use his typical greeting, because it would be self-serving.

Abrams, you magnificent bastard. Now when this trick is used in Piranha 3D, we know who to blame.

Yay. that was so awesome. I've never been a Trekkie but now I understand why people loves it so much.

I think that plot-trick was great way to demonstrate that human spirit will be same, even when circumstances changes.

Really enjoyed it and restored my face in good entertaining powers of movies. And it wasn't dumb at all!

Oh, and let me say, suck it Dustin, I told you Chris Pine was a good guy and good actor. I fuckin kinda knew him in college! He wasn't a pretty boy then, just some dorky nice guy with big hair, shabby leather jacket and serious looks. Everybody liked him because he was really a good guy. I am so happy that he is getting the recognition he deserves!

I saw it last night and I happily take back my Muppet Babies comment. I loved it. I'm so happy I loved it! Very surprised.

I hate all of you.

If I'm lucky I might get to see this sometime, oh, in 2 weeks.

Fuck, I might as well eBay the toy collection, throw away the rubber ears, and use the last of the green boody paint on the neighbor's dog. The ghosts of Bjo Trimble and David Gerrold are going to haunt my ass.

I am in Australia so I got to see this FIRST! Last Thursday for you people. So glad the pajiba review is finally up.

Wasn't the movie just fabulous? I really think that Leonard Nimoy has come full circle. His initially good role as Spock has been transformed into a great role. A fricking fabulous role. A role where people cheer as he enters the film frame. Goddamn he is a good actor. This movie should make him awesomely proud to be Spock.

I am so glad he had more than a cameo too.

My Grad Prof Henry Jenkins (the original star trek fan fiction scholar) has a cameo in this movie. Did any spot him? I did not and I looked.

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you BarbadoSlim, the man dead set on enjoying anything for fear his crankypants won't fit anymore.

"the fantastically done mission: impossible III"...
are you out of your fucking mind?

anyway, it looks like this movie turned out alright, nice review... other than that mi3 crap.

"the fantastically done mission: impossible III"...
are you out of your fucking mind?

Posted by: farik at May 9, 2009 10:48 AM

Swing and a miss

Since I'm still a little woozy from the shaky cam abuse on this, ah, overrated TV pilot I will christen it:

Star Trek XII: The Voyage After Bourne's Wrath.

Since you already have a clear agenda on going personal on this let me give you an appropriately crafted answer Vermillion:

You and your cronies can go on sucking on Jar Jar Abrams cock, while I keep pointing out how years of continuity and character's known history were wiped out on a whim. This is the cinematic equivalent of an ethnic cleansing, a barbarity. Amazing how some shaky-cam and pretty lights are all you need to make people forgive anything.

“Jar Jar Abrams cock” Ha!, that my friends is some funny shit. I was raised on Star Trek, I can see where the purist might not agree with the new direction. But that is the inherent problem with prequels and re-boots, you either like the vision that the director has or not.

*Harlan

They already re-booted the “Greatest American Hero,” it was called “Hancock.”

I agree with you somewhat BarbadoSlim, when Lucas added those fucking annoying ewoks to his “Star Wars” franchise I tuned completely out. Call me crazy but I enjoyed the original “Star Trek” series, I’ve never even bothered about watching any of the spin-off series. For me the new “Star Trek” movie will be closure as far as I'm concerned. If I were Abrams I wouldn’t push my luck, I’d bow out on the “Trek” gravy train while the gettin’ was good.

BarbadoSlim, if Gene were alive today I don’t think he could have made a better movie, don’t get me wrong, he would have a better grasp of the material, but how much better would the movie have been? It’s not like the original “Star Trek” was high art or anything, it was bad acting with even worst special effects, though it was good in it’s own unique way.

But I don't wanna.

And Jim Kirk was, in previous continuity, the youngest man to ever become a captain in Starfleet, and although the circumstances in the previous continuity weren't like this one they remained exceptional.

Posted by: mightygodking at May 9, 2009 2:25 PM
------------------------------------------------

It's not about how young he was (although in JJ's Trek it is absurdly so) it's about *HOW* he earned it. You and I have different definitions for "exceptional"

BarbadoSlim, it's a parallel universe. The original universe, with all its continuity and canon (including all the conflicts of continuity and retcons), still exists. The existence of a different timeline no more destroys the old one than the mirror universe did.

Since you already have a clear agenda on going personal on this let me give you an appropriately crafted answer Vermillion:

Um, there is nothing personal about it. I just find it amusing that you didn't want to see this movie, but saw it anyway, mostly to reinforce your preconceptions. You wanted to be cranky, you got to be cranky. And I got to highlight your crankyness. All your posts were essentially "rassle frasle pretty boy mumble grumble Spock too emotional rassle frassle not MY Trek rasslmumblee". That is funny to me.

As the self-proclaimed champion of free speech around these parts, I thought you of all people would appreciate a little ribbing. I guess I was wrong. And just because I don't agree with you on something, it doesn't mean I am somehow targeting you for attack. I save(d) that for Pookie.

The only one getting personal about it is you, who seems that this movie and anyone enjoying it is some sort of grand affront to your sensibilities. As if we owed you some sort of fealty or something. You are really taking this way too seriously, man.

You can't claim to speak for the whole Star Trek fanbase anymore than I can, chief. I do claim my right to speak for myself, as a long time fan, to say yes, they definitely did give me the finger.

And that alternate timeline excrement is an excuse for not having an original thought on the part of the writers. Hollywood creative bankruptcy at its most glorious. The fact is Kirk, Spock and McCoy's story has been TOLD, there's no need to re-imagine it, regurgitate it or make it into convenient tube-like turd form for Generation Douchebag.

Um, so why did (in Slim's case) you pay to see it anyway, and (in stardust savant's case) you PLAN to see it anyway. It is quite obvious the both of you have made up your minds about the film.

I mean, that seems just as pointless as you deem the film to be.

Since you already have a clear agenda on going personal on this let me give you an appropriately crafted answer Vermillion:

The only person "going personal" is you, Slim. I cracked a joke about your quite-exaggerated offense to this film. I am sorry I didn't get the memo that anybody who might actually like the movie is now a traitor to BarbadoSlim. I mistakenly assumed that, as the self-designated champion of free speech in these parts, you wouldn't take such a ribbing so seriously.

If I somehow hurt your feelings, I do apologize. I still wonder why such an innocuous statement irritated you so.

Geez, if I didn't know any better, I would think you guys actually EXPECTED this film to be a canon prequel. Nobody is forcing you to accept it. And you shouldn't feel sooooo beholden to the franchise that you HAVE to give money to anything with the name "Star Trek" on it. Maybe you need to reconsider your fandom. I know I did when Episode I came out.

Man this is D&D 4th Edition all over again.

You can't claim to speak for the whole Star Trek fanbase anymore than I can, chief.

Right, and I didn't. I just said I "suspect" that your hyperbolic reaction wasn't typical.

I do claim my right to speak for myself, as a long time fan, to say yes, they definitely did give me the finger.

OK, then you should have said something like "I feel like this movie is giving me the finger" rather than saying the movie gives the finger to "to the same audience that has kept the franchise alive"--that was why I said you were claiming to speak for the entire audience of Trek fans. If you just misspoke then great, objection withdrawn.

The fact is Kirk, Spock and McCoy's story has been TOLD, there's no need to re-imagine it, regurgitate it or make it into convenient tube-like turd form for Generation Douchebag.

There's no "need" to tell any story, but if people enjoy it what's the problem? Many people probably became attached to Trek as much for the characters as for the "Trek universe". Anyway, I thought your objection was about continuity, not about revisiting Kirk/Spock/McCoy (or about your cranky-old-man generational stereotypes). If they did a prequel about their early years which meticulously respected established continuity, would you still say it's worthless because their story has been TOLD?

and (in stardust savant's case) you PLAN to see it anyway

I'm a completist. I've got this compulsion to see every Star Trek series and movie. Glutton for punishment, I know, but I'm powerless to resist. At least my library has a great stock of movies so I don't have to spend money on it.

I don't think I have said that anyone, here, who enjoyed/will enjoy that asinine dribble is of lesser intelligence.

Wow, you couldn't even make it through the sentence without doing it.

And the fact that people enjoy it doesn't make it right "people" enjoyed Armageddon too.

So you question their classification as people then? Because that is usually what that means.

Dude, it is really that difficult for you to just say, "it wasn't for me" or "I didn't like it"? Why does it have to be so black-and-white, us-vs-"them" with you? Nobody is going to think less of you, unlike what you are apparently doing to the rest of us.

Don't come complaining to me.

Nobody has yet (except stardust savant), but okay. Whatever.

Yeah, whatever dude.

Enjoy your 'splosions.

I'll complain no matter what. If I don't bitch, I explode into little stardust pieces. Very messy.

I say we pull out some of Ranylt's classic reviews (she was too cerebral for this new secksy generation) and have them re-imagined by our newest corporate whore, Vermillion.

Does that mean I would actually get paid? Because seriously, the bills are getting ridiculous...

Oh....you were being sarcastic. I see. Sorry, I am not familiar with that dialect of dirty hippie.

I'm with you Vermillion! Cannon shmannon...I'm a life long Star Trek Fan and I'm just tiered of the "cannon-Roddenberry-etcetera" worshipers! You people need to get out of the 60's and get with this Century, put your teeth back, if you can find the fixadent, open a package of Clove gum and start chewing for all it's worth because that's the only thrill you're going to get from now on. Whip out your yellow tinted Star Fleet technical manuals and roll playing games from the 70's and lock yourselves in you mother's basement 'till hell freezes over or until you die from a broken heart because your misconstrued idea of what should be ain't and never was.

Get a life, really...

I don't care what all you nerds are bitching and fighting about, I just googled the guy who played Spock and I decided he's also hot as himself. And I had some awfully good dreams last night. Hot sex on the Enterprise is AWESOME.

Nerd Fight!!! Oh, and I initially typed that as Nerf fight which is pretty much the same thing.

Oh Jeeezuss.

(I don't know where this "shaky cam" was happening either)

Sorry, Vermillion, I know that was probably for Snuggiepants, but I must chime in to say that I've always found Spock sexy. Even back in the Leonard Nimoy days. What can I say? I like'em logical.

So I guess a hug is out of the question?

AND... I understand that BSlim is the Perry Ulysses Cox of Pajiba but he's pretty damned funny if you just let his posts roll on through your mind and accept them for what they are.
SOMEONE has to be the contrarian and he does yeoman's work.

C'mon, Guess who! You know that you Pookstah went way over the line.
And you know that we know it.
BSlim is just good, spiky fun.

No need for apologies, V.
I'm a happy 55.
Some who lurk here might feel a bit intimidated by the age thing.
As for me, if I could just learn to control those STUPID, malleable 22 year old minds and bend them to my will...

Jeebus... hard to top that one.

Can this now become the weekend hijack thread?

Ya know... for fun?

Brie, please do not put "it" back into your pants.
I care not much for Quinto as "Sylar" but he makes a marvelous Spock.

I'm with ya, Snuggie.
The non-PC stuff IS canon that Berman violated with ST:TNG.
Dammit.

As for me, if I could just learn to control those STUPID, malleable 22 year old minds and bend them to my will...

I hear explosions and shaky-cams work wonders.....

Enjoy your 'splosions.

I definitely will.

Didn't read the article (just don't care, really) but yay to the Bob Schneider reference.

First of all, let me just say that I liked it for what it was and what it was trying to do.

Is it "Star Trek"? In a way, yes. In a way, no. This movie lacked the deep-rooted morality that Roddenberry and his followers tried to inject into every story. The hard science that was also always a part is somewhat absent here -- how did the "red matter" work, for example? And yes, it's shinier, cooler and more shit goes boom in this one movie than in the other 10 movies put together (most likely).

All of that said, I appreciate what Abrams and Co were trying to do. Star Trek, whether the hardcore fanbase want to believe it or not, had grown too fat and too burdensome for its own good. All of the humor was coming from sentient robots trying to deal with "emotion chips" while all the sexuality came from oversexed bimbo alien chicks wearing tight uniforms who have to mount the captain after they fight each other -- because that's what the tradition demands.

It's amazing to think that a series which centers on that most human of quests -- exploration -- devolved in a very dry, very procedural, no emotion-having franchise.

By retconning the storyline and, in a way, erasing the facts as we know them, Abrams is free to re-inject life and vigor into Star Trek. He doesn't negate what everyone has seen, knows, likes or believes. He simply has the freedom for the characters and stories he wants to tell to have weight to them.

Let me put it another way: We saw 10 years ago, George Lucas take his very dirty, very emotional space opera franchise and turn it into a tale about microscopic bacteria, trade routes taxation and bureaucracy. Rather than follow that example, Abrams has gone with what Nolan did for Batman -- go back to the center of why we give a damn about the main characters.

Is the movie perfect? No. Its villain is a cliche and the sci-fi tropes of time-travel, a mega-weapon and "REVENGE!" are all in here in fine form. But as a Movie 1 of a series, it's not bad.

Looking forward to see what comes next. Sorry for the length.

I have never seen an episode of any Star Trek series, and have only seen two of the movies...Insurrection and Nemesis, I think.

Also largely unfamiliar with Abrams - haven't seen Alias, Lost, or Fringe. But...

*meekly*

...am I the only person excited to see Meghan from Felicity on the Enterprise?

Fredo...love it, baby, love it!

figgy,
As I recall, Kirk is shirtless, a green chick is shirtless, and Uhura is shirtless. Varying lengths on all. Hope that helps.

Just got back from watching it. Enjoyed the movie. Tried not to think about the time travel stuff because that always hurts my head.

The Star Trek Nerd Federation was/is too strong for J.J. to have done anything else then to say, "I was paid lots of money to do a prequel. However, I am not going to spend 8,984,740,264,566.80 hours learning the entire history of Star Trek so I don't fuck with the continuity and have a dork herd attack me at Starbuck's because I didn't hire them as consultants. So I decided to do an 'alternate universe' wherein everything these nerds have come to love and cherish is kept pristine in their time-capsules while I do some original shit that doesn't tie me down and limit what I can do in future movies."

Lets be real people, Trekkers/Trekkies/comic nerd guy, is more protective of their "cannon" then the Vatican is with the Bible.

I expect to see a glowing review for Transformers 2 since it was written by the same sexy, exciting team of writers that brought us this AMAZING adventure.

/eagerly awaits

...am I the only person excited to see Meghan from Felicity on the Enterprise?

I was! And Greg Grunberg does the voice of Kirk's stepdad.

I saw it yesterday and was pleasantly surprised. I thought this was going to Hoover suck and refused to pay to see it, but that's mostly because of my blinding hate for anyone Heroes related, especially Zachary Quinto. My memories of the series are fuzzy at best, so I wasn't particularly offended by any changes. The only problem I had was the fucktard sitting next me who was obviously on his second or third viewing and preceded to laugh like a drunk dolphin BEFORE all the jokes/punchlines/anything. Die.

Preach on Guess Who!!
I've just had an epiphany. I have seen the light, this is the best movie, in like, ever. All it took was the intervention by, you, my Pajiba brothers and sisters to set me straight.

BarbadosSlim, I wasn’t trying to be funny. Trust me I’m like you, I’m a die hard Trekie, my father also. I remember my father making my brother and I look through the t.v. guide to find out what time “Star Trek” came on. The way you feel about “Star Trek” I feel the same way about the “Incredible Hulk.” To this day I have yet to see any of the “Incredible Hulk” movies. In my mind and heart, Bill Bixbe will always be David Banner and I don't care how many Hollywood pretty boys they get to play David Banner, Bill Bixbe is and will always be the man.

BarbadoSlim:

I have to say, I'm with you 100%. Everything you've said about this film has been spot on, IMO.

I went into this film with very little preconception. I purposefully avoided reading much about it ahead of time. I was hopeful, because I grew up on Star Trek (TOS) and have always wished that they'd find a new cast and carry on with those characters, and I had heard just enough positive hype to make me hope that they'd handled it well.

What they actually ended up doing is kill off Trek once and for all, for all the reasons Slim has already given. As much as I hoped I'd enjoy the film, I hated it. As I have more time to think about it I hate it even more. Not because it was a bad movie in and of itself, but because I truly feel betrayed.

I've read the "pro-reboot" arguments that say it would have been difficult to work within the confines of established canon, but I say so what. Sure it would have been difficult, but it could have been done. I think it's a pretty cheap copout to essentially null and void 40+ years of Trek canon in order to create a new vehicle for glitzy adventure, as if there weren't already enough CGI-fests out there. There was no need to bastardize the Trek universe for this. If they had really cared about more than just cashing in an the Star Trek brand, they could have just spent the effort to write a new set of characters and universe and left Star Trek alone, and I probably would have even enjoyed the flick for what it was. Instead they've once and for all pounded a stake through the heart of a franchise that's been a fairly major part of many people's lives up to this point. Sure it's only some movies and books based on an old TV show, but it made an impact in the lives of quite a few people.

Look, I'm glad for everyone that loves this film. I'm glad for all the new fans who might have a new franchise to enjoy. Even my wife loved it, and I said good for her. Of course, she's a "casual" fan who also thought the trailer for "GI JOE" looked awesome.

My anger, and I'm assuming slim's anger as well, is rooted in the fact that they could have accomplished everything they accomplished in this film without killing classic Star Trek. As I'm apparently in the minority with my opinion, I'll just shut up now and quietly lament the fact that this *could* have been a good movie for everyone, if they'd really cared about the Star Trek brand for anything beyond whatever money they can squeeze out of its name.

Posted by: lerxst at May 10, 2009 9:47 AM

-------------------------------------------------

Welcome to the brave new world, where canon is, ahem "shmanon" and anything is up for grabs. Let's go for The Godfather next, Zac Efron can play Michael and Shia Lebouf WILL be the new Vito, we can have Zombie Brando go back in time and give himself the gun to kill Don Fanucci.

It will be awesome and will open it up for a new audience.

Posted by: alone in the dark at May 10, 2009 10:14 AM

Seriously, that's all you got?

Tell you what, big man. Why don't you tell me why I should like it?

Go ahead.

the lens flares didn't bother me. if anything, they gave me quick flashes of illuminations to see my own growing half-chubs thru-out the running time.

quick survey though: was it just my theater or were others across the country FILLED with old folks? i feel that the growing box office numbers were possibly due to the large groups of older people throwing down to see this. (i'm pushing 40, so i'm not really hatin', just thinking that this may have an older fan base than say, fast and furious)

Trust me Slim, the group think around here ain’t superior to your thinking. In my opinion “Phantom Menace” was second only to “New Hope.” Some might think I’m crazy for saying that, but I don’t give a damn about what people say about my taste in movies. Your view of “Star Trek” differs greatly from the group consensus, and that is what makes you so unique you burning hunk you.

Incidentally: My Mother's Day gift?

1pm tickets to the Arclight.

Suck on that, bitches.

You've upgraded it to "mediocre"?

This is some use of the word "hard science" with which I previously was not familiar.

Look, it's not unfeasible that at some point we could invent matter teleportation, artificial gravity or faster-than-light space travel, but come on. Trek uses these things very much as if they were magic and always has.

OK, so it isn't 1.21 gigawatts (which we all know is the exact amount of power needed to activate a time machine).

That is fact and not up for debate.

But Trek always, at least, thought its toys through. Transporters to "beam down" because they couldn't bring such a massive ship into a planet. Phasers because you don't want to punch holes into said ship in space.

(BTW, how come we've never seen ships like the Enterprise have their own fighters?)

This movie works like "Batman Begins". It has to get the cast together and end with them at the stations we know they'll occupy. Abrams does that. Of course, the key for Abrams is going to be what he does next. He's retconned the franchise so that he can do what he likes.

The test for him will be the almost-certain sequel. Because he'll have the cast in place, he'll have carte blanche to do whatever he wants to them and he'll have expectations from a general public to ratchet things up.

Does he give us "The Dark Knight"...or does he give us "The Matrix" sequels?

Posted by: Fredo at May 10, 2009 12:44 PM

------------------------------------------------

*from the point of view of just this reboot no previous baggage

1. Starfleet gives away ships to insubordinate, cadets? The flagship no less. This guy is not even a midshipman, I don't care what universe you are in, no military organization would do that, ever. Doing it here is cartooney and unacceptable. And puleeeze don't tell me ALL the other command track personnel were unavailable. You could just as easily have these guys working as a crew on the ship for the next film and then jump forward and transfer command in a more plausible manner.

2. The villain here was hanging around for 25 years waiting for Spock to pop-up. C'mon.

3. I would expect the Enterprise's engineering section not to look like a fucking brewery next time around.

4. Could do without the overdone Scotty as comic relief bit.

So it was too hard science, then?

Posted by: Jay at May 10, 2009 1:09 PM

-----------------------------------------------

I don't give a rat's ass about the science, I at least expect the aesthetics to match the hallways and the bridge.

It's like having a Lamborghini with a Model T engine.

4. You cast Simon Pegg -- you ask him to bring the funny.

Posted by: Fredo at May 10, 2009 1:43 PM
-------------------------------------------------

It all depends on how he decides to portray it I guess, I know Pegg has the range to be more subtle than what he did here. I think it's a disservice to the character.Plus, you got Checkov also pulling clown duty.
The guy who played Pike looked completely at ease as a commander, best acting of the bunch. And apparently Uhura will become the girlfriend who gets passed around CW style, but I guess that's for the females to accept or be horrified by. As far as the guy who played McCoy I don't know if I wanna be amazed or creeped out by Deforest channeling, it was eerie.
Like someone posted before the sequel to this will be the true test or where they are planning to take it.

I enjoyed when Kirk was a young lad, driving a stolen car and listening to classical music. It really shows that he's a bad ass but still intelligent.

And when you absorb the ramifications of the whole "reboot" you might just find yourself as pissed off as I am.

What ramifications? So the guy went off the well-beaten path. The damn beaten path is still there for any number of people to take! If someone wants to go through the headache of trying to tell an in-canon story, they are free to do so! Just anyone wanting to play in Abram's sandbox is free to do so.

Maybe it is the years upon years of keeping track of Ultimate this and Elseworlds that, or my loving Gundam (the king of alternate continuities), or simply reaching a point in my life where I just don't see the point in such anger, but it just doesn't seem like such a big deal to me to understand such a concept.

You act like this is somehow equivalent to the Star Wars prequels screwing that series, but it isn't. Those were made by the original creator and are officially canon. So even if someone else does a in-canon Star Wars project, they have to put up with that.

Here, you have what is basically fanfiction, but with a better budget. If a person doesn't want it to be in-continuity, then it isn't. There, all done. Unless Gene Roddenberry somehow reconstitutes himself from his ashes orbiting the Earth and says "Fuck all, that was better than my crap-ass show, it is now canon, suck on it" while making phaser sounds with his weirdly-reconstructed ashen mouth, why tear yourself apart about it?

Your beloved Enterprise is still there, and if somebody wants to try and please this vocal minority, all the power to them. And I will give that film just as fair a shot as I did this one.

You guys want to be all angsty and mopey because the engine doesn't look the way you want it to look, that is your deal. I had fun at the movie, and yes, I want to see what else he's got. If it sucks, it sucks. I am not going to cry in my Cheerios about it.

You guys want to be all angsty and mopey because the engine doesn't look the way you want it to look, that is your deal. I had fun at the movie, and yes, I want to see what else he's got. If it sucks, it sucks. I am not going to cry in my Cheerios about it.

Posted by: Vermillion at May 10, 2009 2:41 PM

-------------------------------------------------
Nobody is crying in their Cheerios except YOU and the rest of Web lunatics who are going on a rampage, YES, a rampage, to stomp on and muzzle anyone who you perceive is not falling into line with this new reboot.

Not gonna happen, bubba.

It's like a fucking inquisition, you folks are just going to have to settle down and take the criticism or blow your fucking brains out, I don't really give a shit.

I'm hearing the Trekkers come off just like the hardcore Metallica fans of 1991 when The Black Album came out and they started screaming bloody murder about their favorite band of all time "Selling Out" and "Going Mainstream."

And this is a problem why, exactly?

Once again, we're all entitled to our opinions. If this movie did it for you, great for you. In some ways I envy you. I wanted to like it. Instead, I do feel like the Paramount owned Star Trek franchise has sold out, and it does upset me. And to be honest, I'm glad I'm not the only person who feels this way. It shows me that there are still a few people out there who get it in a land where crap is king.

So sorry if it bothers you to read opinions that differ with your own. I certainly wouldn't want to be responsible for your having to second guess yourself. Fortunately, though, we still (for now, anyway) live in a country where people are free to voice dissenting opinion.

@lerxst: It doesn't bother me one bit that people don't like this movie. Star Trek was never my thing -- as a child of the 80s, I was always more into Star Wars and Back to the Future than Trek. I just know enough to keep my Geek Card current.

My point was that this is what happens when a particular artistic/commercial endeavor changes itself to attract more people into its tent. Some welcome the change as the chance to show others why they loved it in the first place. Others abhor it because it's not what they've come to define it as. It's not that uncommon.

Though, let me just say, that if you feel like Abrams has just taken the biggest, most massive shit on your beloved Star Trek, then just realize that he's just the latest in a long and proud tradition of people who have dropped a deuce all over that puppy. A list that includes William Shatner (Star Trek 5), Stuard Baird (Nemesis), Jonathan Frakes (Insurrection) and Rick Berman (2 or 3 of the TV shows).

Though, let me just say, that if you feel like Abrams has just taken the biggest, most massive shit on your beloved Star Trek, then just realize that he's just the latest in a long and proud tradition of people who have dropped a deuce all over that puppy. A list that includes William Shatner (Star Trek 5), Stuard Baird (Nemesis), Jonathan Frakes (Insurrection) and Rick Berman (2 or 3 of the TV shows).

LOL. OK, I'll give you that.

This is a bit different to me, though. If it were a bad movie that stuck to canon I wouldn't care, to be honest. Instead this tells me that the powers that be - the owners of the brand - have decided to say fuck you to Roddenberry's vision and throw away 40+ years of establishment for a throw away movie with about as much enduring value as The Transformers. That's what bothers me. I couldn't care less about a single movie.

Posted by: Vermillion at May 10, 2009 4:20 PM

Dude get a fucking grip, the masses have won, your movie is a hit. Roddenberry's vision is done, the hope of an optimistic future went kaboom in spectacular fashion next to concepts of racial unity and cooperation *POOF* the first series to present an African American woman as something more than a servant *POOF,* all those classic lines such "I shall always be your friend..." are now punchlines to be delivered in *wink* *wink* to the emergent Neo-Trekker who doesn't want to be weighed down by such silly concepts as continuity.

You won so what's your fucking problem?

Can someone please pass me the popcorn. This shit is getting good.

Think about what? What does that even mean? Did you stomp your feet in defiance when you typed that? There is no lynch mob. You keep saying there is, but only two other people besides me even addressed you directly.

And using such language in relation to a disagreement over a movie pretty much disrespects anyone who actually had to fight lynch mobs or any other form of oppression.

Despite your screenname, this is not Futurama. Nobody is banishing the original series and movies to some faraway planet where you can never see them again. If that is what you want, then rewatch those. But don't come around here trying to make other people feel bad because they might like something different.

I am really trying to understand why you think it is so freaking horrible that someone says they don't agree with you. The only reason I am "all in your grille", so to speak, is because you have gotten carte blanche here since the beginning. You just go on and on about how everything sucks, but when someone truly challenges your viewpoint, you fall back on the same tired ass "oppression and free speech" rigamarole.

You want to go and sit in a corner, and cry how your precious show is gone? That is your deal. You want to cut yourself off from something you love because something tangentially related didn't meet your approval? Again, your decision. But I will be damned if I, or anyone else, have to put up with you punishing everybody for your own disappointment.

And that goes for anyone else who wants to bitch about this crap. You don't like it? Fine. Say your piece and move the hell on.

And since you did throw out your little ultimatum, here is one of my own: I better not hear another damn remark about how someone expressing appreciation for a creator's work is equivalent to being a slave to them. Oh you think somebody is, as you are wont to say, choking on Whedon cock because they say they like one of his shows? Well now we know that your speak from considerable experience.

Remember this, future Star Trek writers! If you don't get those stardates exactly right, you will destroy everything good and wholesome in the universe and kick ol' Gene in the nutsack! BarbadoSlim says if it doesn't say canon, it can't possibly be good!

Allow me to answer your question TheBoy, fuck yes!!!

To Vermillion and Slim: you're both going to be a part of this community long after this whole fight ends. At least I hope you will be. Is ripping into each other like this really worth it?

Yes, actually it is. Because I have no reason to leave, and if he was going to go, he would have done it already.

I have had to withstand all kinds of folks knocking some of my favorites, while also having to listen to them go on and on about crap I could hardly care for. That doesn't make me start going all Chicken Little on society, or excuse me for acting like a petulant child. Why should be any different for anyone else?

Besides, according to Slim, that whole "lack of flame wars" thing is because we are all a bunch of lemmings under the command of our great leader. Only he has the presence of my to avoid the brainwashing.

I really liked Crystal Pepsi.

I'm not going to write a big treatise, here. I'm just going to say this one moderately short thing and leave it at this...

My husband and I (weird to say that, since we're split up, amicably) are Star Trek lovers of old. Our son is a new fan at age 9. We took him to see this today -- my Mother's Day gift. All three of us just fucking loved it. LOVED it. Cried a little, laughed a lot... and were totally engaged throughout.

That's pretty much all we ask of Star Trek.

For a Star Trek fan to demand MORE of any offshoot of that series... makes that fan not so much a FAN... as a deranged fucking FANATIC who gets pretty much any disappointment he deserves when that offshoot fails to deliver on his demands.

It's fucking Star Trek, loony tunes. A fictional television series that broke a lot of ground far ahead of its time, was pretty goddamned revolutionary in a lot of ways -- but was, neverthe-fucking-less, a motherfucking TELEVISION SERIES. Now take off the fucking rubber ears, stop babbling in the made up language, and come back down to planet Earth -- your mother's calling: she made tuna casserole for dinner and says there's a voice message from Blockbuster, your Tuesday work shift got changed to 2pm.

Heh, heh. I caught a chill while watching this yesterday, and I have a pretty stoking fever going now. Here's the Juice: Illness has prevented me from remembering a film that a friend took me to see on a pity-whim. Pity-whims are the best kind, because they almost always come in my favourite price: free.

Was it good? Was it bad? Ask someone not in fuzzy mukluks, this girl doesn't remember. But the fire of this flame war will warm my icy toes until I lose consciousness again.

CAPTIVITY, THE APATOW OEUVRE, OBSERVE AND REPORT, THE WICKER MAN...what I'll mainly remember is the laughter.

It's always interesting to see how people react to re-imaginings or re-boots of franchises in which they have interest or some kind of personal stake. Comic books and science-fiction were not part of my childhood entertainment or education. I'm slowly being introduced to those worlds, but it has only been in the last couple of years.

Perhaps in a sense, I (and all the, I'm sure, myriad others in my position) have an advantage when it comes to these projects, because there's no history or connection. Strong opinions for or against registers just like any of the other pounding surf that accompanies 'Big-Name' enterprises. This is to say, for a person with my very limited financial means, the overwhelming majority of my advertising now comes from the newspaper and subway.

I generally don't agree with David Edelstein-- I actually find him frequently grating--but I remember the minefield he encountered when he didn't enjoy THE DARK KNIGHT. Death threats? That's absurd. At the time when this maelstrom was at its peak, pretty much everyone I had encountered believed that, while yes, those attacks were unreasonable, he had probably only written a negative review for attention. He is known for being kind of contrary. I had neither the money or the interest in seeing it when it was in theatres, so I promptly forgot the whole thing. Then, about six months later, I actually saw it. Intellectually, I could see what was so compelling to everyone, but there's no accounting for taste, because it just did not reach me. At all. Same goes for Spiderman. I'm a diagnosed insomniac who sometimes hallucinates from lack of sleep. Should I be grateful that I was asleep within the first 20 twenty minutes of both the first and second? I still don't know how they end, and I never bothered with the third.

It's interesting to see how people decide to interpret your reaction, and it's kind of a drag when you know what's coming. If you don't like it, you're either a pretentious elitist who would find pancakes drizzled with the blood of Christ 'lacking in passion', or a crazed fanboy who spends the majority of his days 'shaking hands with the unemployed', and therefore outside of the functioning mortal realm.

As far as any STAR TREK goes, I've only seen THE WRATH OF KHAN, and that one episode of FUTURAMA. I've never seen a minute of anything that J.J. Abrams has done, so I'm just categorically unqualified to talk about their individual merits and failings.

But it seems as if the problem that the 'purists' (if that's the right word) have is that Abrams has insinuated himself into someone else's home, and ripped out the foundations to suit his own. And if I understand it, these 'ends' are unearned and anathema to the spirit of that very thing which is being 'celebrated'. So from that point of view, I can see how this would seem like yet another LCD, focus-grouped satiating bowl of pablum, I mean, that's what a lot of contemporary entertainment is, no? That can be endured. But if this type of 'cinema-by-numbers' ideology can be applied to something that was so meaningful for so many, or a crass treatment of what was groundbreaking and in some regards quite powerful, where does it end? Will this backwards slide result in us ending up with a single Post-It Note synopsis of ULYSSES, as crudely intoned by Ashton Kutcher? Maybe it isn't even this film itself, but what it signals and predicts?

But I guess the counter-argument would be that one single faction or lobby--no matter how much any of us feel any kind of 'ownership' or 'protectiveness' over our entertainment choices--it isn't ours to keep. Can the influence of this work be allowed to grow and change and affect us in new ways, or is it a dessicated museum piece vociferously guarded by a group of randoms who declared themselves the standard-bearers? We don't know how Roddenberry would've taken this, we could guess, and probably make really likely and legitimate scenarios in our minds about it. But when push comes to shove, aren't we all just trying to take something that isn't solely ours and keeping it in the sandbox? If yes, why? If not, explain how.

I don't leave my apartment enough to know of these things. I know when Michael (fucking) Bolton released that album of Italian arias, I nearly laid an egg. Why? It wasn't even so much that it was terrible, but because he placed himself within a context without acknowledging that he was a visitor, of sorts. It's not about liking Michael Bolton or not, it's about donning the costume that isn't yours, and doesn't fit. Regardless of what I think of his other work, I know enough of opera to know that he was talking out of this ass on that one. So, acknowledge the debt, context, intentions, at least. I don't give a rat's ass about Rod Stewart singing the American Songbook, but he's honest about what's happening.

Whatever, I'm so tired. Fucking wasted my birthday, and have to get back to hollow work I'll never finish anyway. Have a good one.

I took my mom to see this for Mother's Day. We both loved it. I honestly don't have a problem with the AU out the movie took -- I think it's pretty spiffy that cannon Trek remains cannon (it's not like all of that stuff got eradicated, it's just a split timeline), and that we now get to explore a few potential "What If?" stories.

And add me to the list who wants to do bad things to Spock. I had a huge little girl crush on Original Spock when I was a kid, but New Spock sparks decidedly more, er, grown up feelings in me.

My 63 year old mother, on the other hand, confessed to wanting to jump Kirk. Which is just all kinds of disturbing for me, folks.

Loved it. I'm a later-trek fan, particularly TNG. I only knew enough about the original series to recongise the in-jokes (Never be the guy in red!!). Went with a group of seven, who ranged from huge trekkers to one girl who just went because she likes Chris Pine. We all skipped out of the theatre, babbling about our favourite bits. Last time I experienced that kind of reaction, it was Iron Man, another movie built on a foundation of deeper meaning, converted into a burst of happy best served with with popcorn.

Eh, eventually you just learn to ignore everyone. I've said it before: it's just a matter of knowing that no one's opinion matters but your own. That way you won't be dissuaded by the yellers and other elitists or whatever. Seriously...just tell everyone to fuck off and comment away.

I propose, in the wake of her devastation of every one of us in the vicinity, that we christen some sort of "Maryscott O'Connor Maneuver". Appropriate.

A simple go fuck yourself would have sufficed.

Posted by: Guess who! at May 10, 2009 3:18 PM

Right back at you 'P' to the 'okie'.

I keep pointing out how years of continuity and character's known history were wiped out on a whim. This is the cinematic equivalent of an ethnic cleansing, a barbarity.
Posted by: BarbadoSlim at May 9, 2009 11:18 AM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the whole, I agree with BSlim about this. I even had the same concerns posted my immediate bedazzled reaction, still fresh from the experience (and with lens flares still in my eyes) before the whole "great debate" began.. (May 8, 2009 6:13 PM- for the legalists). So I feel comfortable posting again.

Sure the discussion got heated and I am not looking to add to it. I don't think people are even reading down this far anymore and have moved on to the next movie to excoriate. But I do feel there are flaws and concerns here beyond the mere "my way or the highway" angle.

(And as for unwarranted promotions for 3-year cadets, I found it much more egregious that Scotty pops in and immediately becomes the chief engineer, simply because he is Scotty and has to.)

There were just some things about watching this movie that hit me the wrong way, and the whole debate here made me think a bout it a little more.

All in all, this movie made me feel like I had just watched someone leave the party with my girlfriend...

Never in a million years did I think I'd be getting moist over Spock. Oh...Zachary....

Three days later and it still sucks!

PS: And yeah, tell me how my ass tastes, fun lovers.

If you are out there Ms. Besser I would like to thank you for your lovely posts and hope that you feel better soon. I think that you hit the nail on the head pointing out how revisiting old characters or revered works can lead to the slippery slope of "cinema by numbers" and yet you also poise the question of who has the right to claim ownership over a creation once it has been set free into the public sphere. I don't have the answer to this point. It's like asking someone who they liked most drawing Supes or what translation of the Odyssey was most faithful to the Homeric tongue. Some like the poetry of Pope but revere Fagles' fidelity. Some love Curt Swans pencils of the Man of Tomorrow but loathe anything John Byrne did to the character. I guess what i am trying to say is that taste is still the ultimate arbiter, more capricious then a cat tending the litterbox.

Can someone explain what a "real fan" is? What are the entry requirements to "real fandom"? How many years of watching various Trek incarnations does it require, what are the age limitations, and which of the series/books/fanfic/documentaries am I allowed to enjoy for Official Real Fan status?

Once someone establishes that, I'll know what my reaction is supposed to be once I find time to see the film: I'll know if I'm required to vent my righteous indignation if I hate it, or if I am permitted to celebrate my relief if I dig on it.

(Full disclosure: I am dubious about this whole endeavor but heartened by the reactions of folks I know who are well-versed in Trek "canon" - so we'll just have to see, won't we?)

BarbadoSlim, I see you are a Shaq music fan.

Saw it over the weekend, and it was pretty good. Orci and Kurtzman still don't know how to write without spewing contradictions and plot holes all over the shop, but their characterization was pitch-perfect and the action intense. Plus, Chris Pine was every bit the magnificent bastard that is Kirk.

I have no problem with violating canon, or anything of that nature because of two things: 1. their explanation was sufficient. Time travel occurs in the Trek universe, so whatevs. 2. The characters were ultimately treated with respect. Except for the Doc McCoy minstrel show. (And does it bug anyone else that a Korean guy was playing a Japanese guy or is that me being too sensitive?)

My biggest, and only real problem with the movie, was the straining credulity beyond all belief coincidence of Kirk and Future Spock crashing on the same planet from different starships only kilometers apart. And the general behavior of the space beastie, which after having killed a perfectly satisfactory meal, chases after a much smaller meal. That's it. And in a big summer movie having only one moment like that means this one is a win. But I really liked this movie. So did the missus. And my mom. And my Trekkie cousin. And my cinophile best friend. I have to agree with ScienceGeek - it was like coming out of Iron Man.

I have now seen three good movies this year. Coraline and Crank: High Voltage being the other two.

A brilliant note from my friend, Grags:

Dear George Lucas, The Star Trek prequel was a thousand times better than all of the Star Wars prequel movies put together. Maybe you should hire JJ Abrams next time.
Live long and prosper, Grags

I loved it. I loved it for what it was and for doing what it wanted to do.

It was not, however, about anything, and I think that, apart from the desire to be a twat, is the sticking point with some of the commenters expressing their dissatisfaction.

Star Trek, at its best, was about something. I went back and watched The Undiscovered Country before seeing the new one, and I was really struck at how dark and meditative it was on the idea of their not being a place for you in the world. That's some good heady shit.

This latest film set the pieces in position wonderfully, I thought, and it did it in an enjoyable fashion. Sure, the Scotty-out-of-nowhere-becoming-chief-engineer thing kinda leapt out for being required more than organic, but it got the principal characters in play. It just lacked a bit of depth.

But it was fucking awesome to watch.

I don't think it it does fit into the original timeline. I mean, in the original timeline, Vulcan is still there.

The biggest compliment I can pay to this movie is it made me want to trade in my lightsaber for a phaser, The Force for Logic, and the Millenium Falcon for the USS Enterprise-A (alternate timeline edition).

J.J. Abrams has yet again added millions of dollars of worth to his name. THIS is how you make a Star Trek movie. (And folks, if you can, see it in IMAX. Your soul will thank you for it.)

JakesAlterEgo, it's to be assumed Old Spock disappears post Voyager timeframe, if Star Trek Countdown is any indication. From what I read, it sounds like he basically disappears at the furthest point (that we're privy to, anyway) in Original Timeline history and winds up at the start of the Alternate Timeline.

I agree with BSlim!

Did you damn people see "The Bourne Ultimatum" or what?

"Shaky cam" my ass, you pansies.

Blair: Apparently this concern was one shared by John Cho, but I heard the situation explained on the radio last week.

Though the original Sulu was played by Japanese-American actor George Takei, the character's nationality is never revealed. Gene Roddenberry wanted a multi-ethnic cast, but didn't want to see them confined by specificity of heritage or citizenship. When deciding on the name of the character, he chose Sulu as a reference to the Sulu Sea and Archipelago, which reach multiple areas and touch many different regions.

Mr. Cho: Wow, thank-you very much! I got myself some medicine, and now that it's getting dark, I grant myself permission to let it perform its magic.

Ok so I have watched sprinkles of all of the ST series old and new. I do remember a list of bumper stickers to be made list that I received and one of them was "Very funny Scotty, Now beam down my pants!". Without sounding like I have the I.Q. of a tangerine I am not a Trekkie or a Trekker but I would like to say it was so awesome to be introduced to this subculture that I know consider myself a Trekksterina. For once a movie longer than two hours and I wasn't worried about a numb but or "god when is this going to fuking end?" See it or Die!

-Tyler Perry should of been a fucking extra Romulan that's how useful he was to this movie. No offense or insults to the courageous stuntman falling off the drill...

BSlim, I just want to know who made you the arbiter of what is and is not Star Trek? I get that you didn't like the movie, but what gives you the fucking right to say that anyone who likes this movie isn't a "true" fan, that anyone who likes it is a "neo-trekkie"? I say "Fuck you" to you and the high goddamned horse you rode in on!

I'm 40 years old, my earliest memories are of drawing pictures of the Enterprise while watching the original series in syndication. I've watched every episode of every series, I own every technical manual, blueprint, and damn near every toy that's ever been made that relates to Star Trek. Hell, I have a tribble sitting next to me on my desk at work as I write this. Don't you dare tell me I'm not a Star Trek fan. I have spent my entire life immersing myself in its lore, watching and rewatching its many stories.

I love this movie.

This movie is far closer to "cannon" and much closer to the original spirit of things than anything Star Trek that has come along in years. It certainly doesn't do a disservice to Star Trek the way some of the later movies and series did.

Star Trek isn't about the technology. It isn't about continuity, or timelines, or any crap like that. It is about morality and character. No, these are not quite the characters we grew up with. These are the people who will become those characters. This movie is about how, even with the course of history changed, the core of these characters remain the same. And it is still a message about hope for the future. I look forward to seeing more of their story, to watching them grow to be the characters I first fell in love with oh so many years ago. And now, with the success of this new enterprise, perhaps a new generation will discover those same beloved characters, and share the sense of optimism and wonder that I've known for 40 years.

CptCrckpot: As a Trekkie of the same vintage as yourself, you said everything that I feel about parts of this debate perfectly, thank you SO much for that.

Also, for those who want even more clarification on the Sulu casting choice:

I was listening to a CBC interview with George Takei about a month ago, and according to GT, JJ had a private meeting with him before he finally cast the Sulu role. He really liked Cho for the role, but wondered if casting a Korean man previously played by a Japanese man would be appropriate. It was during that meeting that GT related the story of how Roddenberry came up with the Sulu name as Jo 'Mama' describes above. In short, GT gave his blessing, and felt Cho to be a good choice for the role.

The very fact that JJ would even bother to meet with GT, and to include him in the process of casting the role he made famous, speaks volumes to me. I think the franchise is in good hands, and the result is on the screen. IMHO

Saw it opening night, seeing it again this week!

Well said. I also noticed the typeface of location marker within the film, but no review has linked them to his Lost franchise. Good eye. ;]

This movie is probably one of my favorite Bad Robot productions. Cannot wait for 2011 when ST:2 is finalized.

I am one of the vocal minority who hated this movie, for all the reasons already stated here. I have been a fan of the original Star Trek all my life. (I watched The Next Generation but felt that the movies that series spawned really killed the franchise.) I was really excited to see this...I really was, but was left heartbroken at first, and now days later very angry. I have a feeling that in a few months, there will be a very strong backlash to this film.

I LOVED this movie (despite a soundtrack drag at the beginning--thanks dude in front of us who went to get a cinema worker-bee to fix the problem). It was great escapist fun. I'm a life-long Star Trek fan and I had no problems with this "re-imagining" of the franchise. Plus it included my favorite Beastie Boys song. I would totally smoke a big space fatty with Sulu and Scotty in the engine room. What is Federation policy on weed? Or do they have synthojuana--like synthohol? What good would that be?

I read this whole thread just to catch BarbadoSlim's comments. Suck on that, haters.

While I think both sides made valid arguments, BSlim's position was more interesting, and the crybabies wailing that he was pissing in their cereal made me laugh.

...saw this Saturday @ the Henry Ford IMAX(a real IMAX screen)...

seeing it again this week same place.

IMAX RULES!

Have to catch it again too...on one of them normal screens...

What I kept thinking was that Star Trek was the film Nemesis could - and really should - have been. Mad Romulans with doomsday weapons (even their ships look alike, and they're both bald to boot) threaten to destroy the earth. We've even got duplicate Federation characters running around (two Spocks as opposed to two Datas and two Picards). I could be accused of going out on a limb, but in an interview discussing the next sequel Orci and Kurtzman point out that Khan and Dr. Soren would still be alive in the alternate timeline. So presumably we've got Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan II (or I suppose Space Seed II) and Generations II in the works. What was the point of freeing up the franchise only to go back remake it bit by bit? Sci-fi is about new ideas and these guys are hacks.

CptCrckpot:

You and I aren't having any serious disagreement...clearly we are both fans of the adventure vs. the "science" in Trek. My engineroom comment was simply a reference to my slight technical curiosity about that world. The Trek universe as a whole is stuffed to the rafters with internal inconsistencies on every level from science to plot to characterizations, therefore to try to pick this particular movie apart on that basis is simply buffoonish. But apparently we still have the canon nerds ready and willing to drag down this new iteration just as they sank the Prime timeline version. And let's just face facts...the Trek Prime universe had become a very dull and depressing place.

And to repeat: BSlim's remark about Nimoy's portrayal of Spock stands as a shining beacon of the insular fanboi stupidity that can't get shitcanned fast enough...

I wasn't disagreeing with you at all Barry, I just thought you'd be interested in seeing "why" the engine room was so huge. The real reason why is simply because that is how the people who made the movie wanted it to look, or course.

Technical inconsistencies abound in Star Trek, and numerous books have been written trying to smooth out those rough edges. I think we can both agree that a good story trumps adherence to canon, and that the canon is filled with numerous stories, good AND bad, which have taken liberties with the canon. And I could not agree more that Trek had become dull and depressing, which is why this movie is such a breath of fresh air.

White geek male banging color blind black girl who has no clue as to how far she sets race relations back. Halle Barry could not have done a better job. Bring on the Academy Awards!

Is this the furture?

I dunno... I just didnt like it

http://nojarjar.ning.com/

We welcome your replies and opinions. We don't BAN members like others.

The first time I saw it, I laughed. I mean it was really bad. I can't understand the hysteria over movies like this and Dark Knight. It was like you are watching this, get bored, and fast foward to the next chapter on a dvd.

BTW, saw the movie twice and spotted more flaws than I realized the first time in the plot(?) This movie really needed a writer...and they had two?!?

Doc Noc